Channel 4 axes Married At First Sight UK after review following misconduct claims
Channel 4 has cancelled Married At First Sight UK following an external review triggered by “serious allegations of wrongdoing”.
uncertain
Channel → ax → wrongdoing
In June a Mafs UK cast member was arrested on suspicion of rape.
asserted
member → arrest → rape
All three men deny the claims.
uncertain
men → deny → claims
Channel 4 has now confirmed the series, which had been a big hit for the broadcaster, will not be returning, with the show’s budget to also be “reinvested in distinctive new programming”.
Channel 4 chief executive Priya Dogra confirmed that season six of the show, which was filmed earlier this year, will not be broadcast.
Second Married at First Sight, a spin-off set to bring contestants from the UK and Australian versions of the show for a second chance at love, was in pre-production with CPL before being paused during the review.
It will not resume production.
asserted
It → confirm → production
The review was commissioned by Ms Dogra earlier this year following the allegations made on Panorama.
asserted
review → commission → Panorama
The review had two elements, law firm Clyde & Co examined the welfare protocols in place at the time the claims were initially raised, and how Channel 4 and production company CPL handled them, while former BBC One controller Lorraine Heggessey examined if any changes should be made to current protocols for Mafs UK to further strengthen contributor welfare.
uncertain
changes → have → welfare
Channel 4 said neither element of the review “sought to adjudicate” on the serious allegations of wrongdoing highlighted by Panorama, which it said “remain a matter for the relevant authorities”.
asserted
it → say → authorities
The Clyde & Co review, which reviewed 31,172 documents and 20 hours of broadcast and unbroadcast footage, found that Channel 4 and production company CPL’s welfare protocols were compliant with the Ofcom Broadcasting Code.
asserted
protocols → review → Code
It also found that there was no breach of the Code in regard to the handling of issues raised.
However, the review noted there were isolated incidents where the welfare framework was not fully implemented.
asserted
framework → find → issues
It cited an instance when some contributors contravened the code of conduct relating to “prohibited substances” but were given a first and final warning rather than being removed from the programme.
asserted
contributors → cite → programme
In addition, Heggessey’s report cited that some elements of the show could “implicitly put pressure on contributors to be intimate” and that contributors could “become dependent on production and lose touch with reality”, which could affect their “decision-making”.
uncertain
which → cite → making
It found certain areas where it considered that the contributor welfare framework could be further strengthened.
uncertain
framework → find → areas
It recommended that the “frequency” with which couples were asked about the physical side of their relationship should be reviewed, also adding that Intimacy Week and Partner Swap Week should be discontinued.
asserted
Week → recommend → relationship
The review also said other changes to consider included changing the leave/ stay mechanism so that if one person in a couple chose to leave the show, they could do so, rather then be forced to continue.
uncertain
they → say → show
On the show couples can choose whether to “stay or leave” during weekly Commitment Ceremonies.
asserted
couples → choose → Ceremonies
However, if one chooses to leave but another asks to stay, both must remain for another week.
asserted
both → choose → week
The Heggessey review found that the welfare protocols for Mafs UK were “extensive, extremely thorough and of a high standard”, adding that with enhancements to the existing contributor welfare framework and adjustments to the format, it would be reasonable to continue to produce future seasons of the show.
asserted
it → find → show
Ms Dogra said that while the implantation of the review’s recommendations would be feasible, it would entail a “materially greater level of intervention, monitoring and supervision that would fundamentally alter the format and editorial proposition of the programme”.
asserted
that → say → programme
The broadcaster said that “taken together with the maturity of the programme”, Ms Dogra determined the “right course was to bring Mafs UK on Channel 4 to an end”.
asserted
course → say → end
“Whilst the review praised the welfare protocols in place and made no findings that Channel 4 breached the Ofcom Code or that the format is inherently unsafe, I have to consider when is the right time for Channel 4 to move on from a format.
asserted
Channel → praise → format
“The recommendations are eminently sensible and feasible, but considering their wholesale implementation provoked fundamental questions about the editorial proposition of a show that, I believe, has now run its course over 10 years.”
asserted
I → consider → years
Addressing the three women who made the allegations on Panorama, Ms Dogra also said she was “very sorry for the distress those women have clearly felt”.
asserted
women → address → distress
“I hope our actions – in swiftly commissioning the review and taking clear, decisive steps – demonstrate our commitment to the wellbeing of all contributors and our desire to relentlessly strengthen industry standards,” she said.
asserted
she → hope → standards
Ms Dogra went on to add that Mafs UK had been “enjoyed by millions of viewers” and thanked everyone who had worked on the show, adding that they undertook “significant efforts to protect the welfare of contributors”.
asserted
they → go → contributors
She added: “Channel 4 has always thrived on reinvention and this is a moment to kickstart a new era of creative renewal.”
asserted
this → add → renewal
Channel 4 said that the budget previously allocated to Mafs UK would now be used to commission “bold, innovative new programmes from the UK independent production community”.
asserted
budget → say → community
A statement from CPL said: “CPL understands Channel 4’s decision to bring Mafs to an end on the channel.
asserted
CPL → say → channel
“The independent reviews gave CPL the opportunity to discuss in depth the welfare processes already in place and that the Heggessey review found that ‘the welfare protocols for Mafs UK were extensive, extremely thorough and of a high standard from which other productions in the industry have learnt’.
asserted
productions → give → industry
“CPL has always put contributor welfare at the heart of its programme making and will continue to do so.
“CPL have worked closely with Channel 4 for many years and throughout the review process, and we look forward to working with them again in the future.”
asserted
we → put → future
The Aporia
