Strictly Come Dancing Wins Ratings War Because X Factor Is 'Past It'

Why Strictly Has Trumped X Factor This Year

Strictly Come Dancing has smashed X Factor's ratings this year because Simon Cowell's show is "past it".

That's the verdict of Strictly judge Craig Revel Horwood, at least.

"If you have good contestants with good fun, different personalities, you'll have a good show. That is why Strictly will last 20 years and X Factor is already past it."

CRH went on to blame the X Factor's rating-drop on their judges being biased about performers, and this year's winners being "a girl band made up of rejected average solo singers".

Although his comments can't be called impartial, they are still telling, and it seems CRH's opinions are supported by the viewing figures.

The X Factor has this series recorded its lowest audience for four years, while Strictly has taken the ratings crown for four weeks in a row, right up to last Saturday, when it had 12.3million viewers - 500,000 more than X Factor's 11.8million.

Strictly still hasn't conquered the Sunday results show ratings, and despite 4 million fewer people watching the X Factor final this year, a huge 15.3 million still tuned in to watch Little Mix win.

But it seems more and more people are coming to the conclusion that it is Strictly providing the better, more rounded Saturday night entertainment.

In addition to CRH's comments, here are some other reasons why X Factor just isn't cutting it anymore...

X Factor is dogged by rumours of on- and off-stage spats, ranging from Louis and Gary bickering, to more serious accusations of bullying by contestants. It's a pop-tastic show with a nasty undertone. This can understandably turn people off who are just looking for some light-hearted escapism.

There are also far more smiles and far fewer tears on Strictly, which allows us to share in the visible satisfaction of contestants as they improve through the series.

X Factor judges claim to see how much their acts have "grown" throughout the show, but this transformation is usually limited to hair and sartorial makeovers. Strictly, on the other hand highlights celebrities, such as Chelsee Healey, who doesn't know the first thing about rhythm, genuinely being trained and guided into highly-proficient ballroom dancers.

Then there's the annoying matter of adverts cutting up the X Factor's drawn-out 2 hour long episodes at what seems like five-minute intervals.

"Viewers are cottoning onto TV producers' tricks and they feel they are being ripped off," a senior executive at a media agency told The Guardian. "They are aware they are being used as vehicles to be advertised to rather than as TV viewers to engage with."

Strictly, on the other hand, gets everything over and done with without long breaks and drawn-out results.

Or could it be the X Factor's new judges that are to blame for the ratings slump?

Not everyone is a fan of Kelly's cheesy Americanisms, Gary's sullen seriousness and Tulisa's fierce attitude. Calls for our Chezza to return, along with the human hairbrush at the heart of the show - Mr Simon Cowell - have been heard booming through the likes of Twitter throughout the series.

Strictly's judges remain the same, with Alesha Dixon blossoming in her new role now we seem to have forgiven her for replacing Arlene Phillips.

Finally, as CRH commented, the X Factor's contestants just haven't been up to scratch this year, whereas Strictly has provided us with some crackers. And while X Factor wannabes have been murdering Damien Rice's Cannonball, Russell Grant has been impersonating one.

Too many charisma-free singers made it to this year's final and we wouldn't buy an album by any of them - maybe, just maybe, Misha B - but her days were numbered as soon as Tulisa opened her mouth.

As for the wacky contestants who shook up the competition, this year we had Johnny Robinson, arguably Kitty Brucknell and the mercifully short-lived Frankie Cocozza, but they were no Wagner or Jedward, were they?

Close

What's Hot