Over 20 seasons, the Apprentice boardroom has not been short on drama – but one recurrent theme is the UK show’s penchant for problematic contestants.
This season, which airs its first episode on Thursday, is no different. Offensive tweets posted by contestant Levi Hodgetts-Hague from a decade ago have been unearthed since filming, prompting the BBC to urge the show’s production company to carry out stricter background checks on contestants.
The posts described Muslims as “dirty”, women as “slags” and “dogs”, police officers as “pigs”, and expressed support for British far-right activist Tommy Robinson while urging British people to take a stand against Islam.
A BBC spokesperson said it was “completely unaware” that the contestant had made “such abhorrent comments”. The independent production company has been asked to fully review the social media checks undertaken “given the process has clearly failed in this instance”.
“The views presented are totally unacceptable and we are taking this extremely seriously,” the BBC said.
Yet this is far from the first time that the Lord Sugar-fronted show – which pitches 20 candidates who pride themselves on their ruthlessness against each other to compete for £250,000 – has provoked controversy for its choice of contestants.
In January, a separate former contestant from the season which aired in 2024, Dr Asif Munaf, was struck off the medical register after a tribunal found he posted 36 antisemitic, racist and sexist posts on social media.
It also emerged after filming that season 13’s Tom Bunday had been jailed for violent assault, while in 2006, rightwing commentator Katie Hopkins caused outrage for her controversial comments.
Julian Henry, a celebrity PR, said the production company, Naked, carried “ultimate responsibility for any dodgy talent expressing inappropriate views, past or present”, and not the BBC.
Noting that Naked is owned by a large media group, and has a very experienced chief executive, he said: “The BBC are right to complain about their vetting process; checking the background of any members of the public is time intensive and costly so there’s an obvious temptation to cut corners by the casting teams.”
Jamie Medhurst, professor of film and media at Aberystwyth University, said that the combination with the MasterChef host scandal last year suggests there is “some kind of lack of oversight here again”.
“It may be that the corporation needs to review the way it commissions or works with independent production companies,” he said.
“The posts were made over 10 years ago and so it’s possible that the person responsible for casting, selecting and researching the competitors didn’t go back far enough.”
But he noted that there could be a pressure to cast “interesting” characters who will create drama, tension and character development over the series.
“That wouldn’t work if all competitors were completely ‘safe’. I’m not suggesting that the producers knew the full extent of the character’s background, but adding people like Hopkins into the mix makes for more engaging viewing if you think of the drama that might ensue.”
Alex Segal, managing director of InterTalent agency, said that many people do not realise that reality TV shows such as the Apprentice and Traitors are ensemble casts, meaning that “every person on that show has to fit a certain role”, reflecting a mix of ideas, ages, backgrounds, ethnicities and extroversion, and that many are approached rather than apply.
“When you have a mix it creates drama, because people think differently to other people, and that creates drama, tension and humour – all the things that make a great TV show,” he said. “The Apprentice is fantastic at that – people are friends one minute and throw them under the bus the next.”
Casting agents will use people or AI do a deep dive into social media to pick up “rude words or extreme views”, or outsource this to companies, but he noted that this was “not bulletproof”, since it can be difficult to pick up offensive views if they do not use the specific language being searched for.
“If Hodgetts-Hague’s comments had been picked up, he wouldn’t have made the show I suspect,” Segal said.
“Clearly it slipped the net. In this particular [case] they’ll all be very disappointed, it’s not the way they want to start a new series. It doesn’t matter how good he might be on the show or in the interview process, that is inconsequential compared to what he’s said.”
All Apprentice candidates are DBS (Disclosure and Barring Service) checked, have their social media history investigated by a third-party provider and receive social media training including guidance on inclusive language and respectful behaviour.
A spokesperson for Naked said: “We are fully committed to our duty of care and compliance responsibilities and have robust casting processes in place across the show.
“Compliance is taken extremely seriously, and our procedures are kept under continual review.”
