★★★★★ 0/5

Should Ninja Warriors be drug-tested?

It’s only TV. How invasive should producers become to bring us family entertainment?

17
Leave a comment

We’re getting into a weird area if reality TV contestants are going to be drug-tested before they can participate, but yesterday media were raising that very question for Australian Ninja Warrior.

 Would it go to the show’s credibility if we found out later a finalist had taken steroids? I suppose so, especially if they knocked someone else out of a shot at the $100,000 prize.

But this is TV not the Olympics. Where do we draw the line as to being invasive for the sake of some family entertainment? And what about Australian Survivor?

Endemol Shine told Fairfax that whilst contestants were not drug tested, extensive background checks had been undertaken. That’s the same protocol for international versions of ANW.

An unnamed coach told the newspaper drugs such as steroids wouldn’t necessarily help contestants, said they could assist with alertness and recovery.

Seems to me the onus should be put on the participant to sign a contract where they confirm they do not use performance-enhancing drugs. At least this dissolves producers should anything arise later.

17 Responses

  2. Yes because it’s a competition and the competition needs to be fair. I agree that it will be entertaining TV regardless of what happens behind the scenes but it’d be nice for them to make it fair.

    1. Testing for all performance-enhancing drugs would be an onerous imposition on the show’s owners/creators.

      Besides, it’s already fair now – anyone who wishes to dope can do so.

  3. Ninja Warriors should be supplied with drugs to boost the entertainment value. Maybe if they do a trail task and win the right to select their drug of choice. Just look at the U.S. wrestling shows and the many early deaths and also the physique of the participants….mmm….they look a bit too well built to be true to me. Drug use is widespread in society and some areas of the entertainment industry, so let’s embrace it yeah? Opinions appreciated…

  5. “No” is the answer to that question. Even tho’ the competition can be construed as sport, the prize money is being offered by a company and it is up to that company to decide under what circumstances it will be handing over the cash.

    While testing for common illegal drugs would be relatively straightforward, it’d be impractical and expensive to test for the full range of performance-enhancing drugs and all of the possible masking agents.

    Pretty sure the presenters were on something the way that they excitedly shouted all of the time.

  6. This is entertainment and not sport, if it falls under the banner of ASADA then sure, have them tested, otherwise no.

    I have a much more serious suggestion, they should drug test the people watching this show if they want err positive results!

    1. But what is the difference between a contest that is presented as a reality game show (like say ANW) and a contest that is considered professional sport (which is what ASADA covers)? I don’t think there is much of a difference (outside of participants being hired to play professional sports at a while anyone can apply and get on a reality show).

      Also, I enjoyed the second part of your comment lol, totally agree.

  7. It’s a tricky one, should the producers have the same duty of care as Pro Wrestling, more and more that Sports Entertainment has cracked down on steroids (and other drugs), which in part is responsible for the deaths of many of it’s performers between the ages of 40 and 50. Guess in this case they aren’t having people compete week in week out and travelling on top of it, plus with them competing in a few events and then it’s over, I’d guess most of the steroids would be out of their system come compete time anyway. Well apart from ones to help breathing like prednisone and others used for asthma, copd and etc., like the ones Brock Lesnar got busted with in his UFC fight recently.

  8. Hi David, long time fan of your site but I’ve noticed a marked shift in the tone to your writing recently. You’re becoming more opinionated and even bitchy. In the past this article would’ve been factual reporting, and you would have injected your opinion from the first sentence into the last one instead. Plus look at your headline from yesterday’s Mariah article, and your savage Yummy Mummies review. Why the change in tone? Sure it’s your blog and you can do what you like, just letting you know people notice the difference.

    1. Hi Markyboy. I appreciate the feedback but not sure the perception is reflective of the site. Opinion has been part of what I do since Day 1, it’s actually what separates a personal blog from other media. Here are a few links from 2007 posts that are very forthright in their expression: here, here and here. Sometimes I am playful with a headline (Mariah, Planet of the Apes yesterday) but it just depends on the story, a pun, or how I feel about the topic. The key is to be authentic. Many people loved the YM review, but here is another savage review with no stars from 2013. Hope that helps!

        1. Yes. I’ve learned over the years it is important to put ‘yourself’ into your own blog. As I mentioned the key is to be authentic. If you love it, rave. If you hate it, say so. But don’t try to manufacture either for the sake of clicks.

    2. Not that David’s work needs defending, but when Seven decides to put mind numbing shows such as Yummy Mummies, they deserve to be torn a new one and savagely as well. These sorts of shows are an insult to our intellect. When someone like David reviews and gives it no-stars this should be a message to the producers.
      Keep up the good work David.

Leave a Reply