The Apprentice, famously, is a business competition. Previous series have given us successful ventures including Susie Ma’s Tropic Skincare, Dr Leah [Totton] Skin Clinics, and Sarah Lynn’s Sweets In The City pic n mix brand—now stocked in Harrods, Selfridges, Waitrose and Harvey Nichols.
What The Apprentice notably isn’t is America’s Next Top Model, which is why everyone was slightly flabbergasted when it was revealed that Lord Alan Sugar’s potential business partners were reportedly made to line up in order of attractiveness when they auditioned for the show.
Thomas Skinner, who was a candidate on series 15 in 2019, told the Daily Star that business hopefuls were made to arrange themselves in order from ‘ugliest to prettiest’ while producers watched to see how they conducted themselves.
‘You don’t know who these people are and you’ve got people arguing about who’s the prettiest,’ said Skinner. ‘It’s carnage but there were people arguing saying “I’m much better looking”’
From a mental health perspective alone, this sounds horrific. And while this could be a psychological experiment to see how potential candidates fare when they have to advocate for themselves, could they not have ranked themselves in order of intelligence or business competence? Why looks?
One of the most pervasive biases in the workplace is beauty bias, also known as ‘lookism’. Attractive people are more likely to be interviewed and hired for jobs, they’re more likely to be promoted, and statistically earn 10-15% high wages, according to academic studies{
For The Apprentice, a competition where candidates are supposed to be judged solely on their business competency, to adopt lookism into the intrinsic fibre of the show by using attractiveness rankings to determine whether candidates will be on the show is sigh-inducing.
There’s no escaping the fact that television is a visual medium and that the overwhelming majority of people on it are above-average levels of attractive. But we’re pretty sure they don’t do hot or not line ups for contestants on University Challenge or Mastermind. Sometimes, the small screen can be about the brain.
Viewers have complained that the Apprentice is steadily becoming less about business and more about reality TV. Showbiz columns are often littered with stories about which former contestants are hooking up with who and some, like Camilla Ainsworth, have gone on to have successful influencer careers. ‘It's just Love Island in suits this season,’ wrote one viewer on Twitter.
The BBC has previously been forced to respond to allegations from Lord Sugar’s former aide Nick Hewer that the most intelligent candidates are never selected for the show because audiences couldn’t keep up. He also claimed that on one occasion a producer attempted to keep a contestant on the show rather than firing her because she was blonde but ‘thick as a fridge door’.
A spokesperson for the show denied the accusations and maintained that all firing decisions remain with Lord Sugar because The Apprentice is ‘a serious business reality series’. But if that’s the case, why must these serious entrepreneurs rip apart each other’s looks before they even get on the programme?
It’s worth noting that, of course, contestants are capable of being intelligent and beautiful at once. The two attributes aren’t mutually exclusive. But this focus from producers on looks over logic is wrong for the format and, importantly, it’s just quite nasty.
While reality shows like Love Island have been criticised for how they treat contestants before, during, and after their appearance on the show, The Apprentice appears to have been able to persist with toxic interview tests that could have mental and emotional tolls on business hopefuls in the future.
Grazia has contacted the BBC for comment.
READ MORE: British Reality TV Has An Age Problem
Karren Brady's Facial Expressions Are The Best Part Of The Apprentice
The Problematic Behaviour That Connects Curtis Pritchard And Lord Sugar