Ballroom Dance > Dancing on TV > Karina Smirnoff May she can kiss her dancing days goodbye

Discussion in 'Dancing on TV' started by lacubs, Apr 9, 2011.

  1. lacubs

    lacubs Member

    'Dancing with the Stars' pro Karina Smirnoff posing nude for Playboy Tweet By Elizabeth Kwiatkowski, 04/08/2011 Dancing with the Stars professional dancer Karina Smirnoff will soon be leaving nothing up to the imagination. Smirnoff -- who is currently paired with actor Ralph Macchio on Dancing with the Stars' twelfth season -- will be baring it all in the upcoming issue of Playboy. "The May issue of Playboy is unforgettable with Dancing With The Stars' Karina Smirnoff on the cover and nude inside," Hugh Hefner, Playboy's founder and editor-in-chief, announced on Twitter Wednesday. However, according to a subsequent report, the decision to pose nude in Playboy may cost Smirnoff -- who has participated in 9 of the ABC reality competition's 12 seasons -- her Dancing with the Stars job. "If Karina posed naked, she can kiss her dancing days goodbye. I hope for Karina's sake that this isn't true," a source told PopEater, adding that discussion over her appearance in the magazine has been "causing people backstage at the hit family show to freak out." While Smirnoff's representative and ABC declined to comment, an insider told PopEater they are concerned the Playboy appearance will "soil" the Dancing with the Stars' wholesome image. "ABC publicity department controls the image of this show with an iron fist. It's a cash cow and they are not going to allow its reputation to be soiled by a dancer who wants to do Playboy," a source said. In addition to rubbing the network the wrong way, Smirnoff also reportedly violated the terms of her contract by modeling for Playboy without receiving permission from her bosses. Ironically, Smirnoff isn't the only twelfth-season Dancing with the Stars cast member with Playboy ties. Kendra and former The Girls Next Door star Kendra Wilkinson -- who posed nude in Playboy and lived in the Playboy mansion as one of Hefner's girlfriends -- is also among the celebrities competing on the season. Hefner has been spotted in the Dancing with the Stars audience supporting Wilkinson, but according to PopEater, he has also been rooting for Smirnoff. http://www.realitytvworld.com/news/...a-smirnoff-posing-nude-for-playboy--12166.php Playboy founder Hugh Hefner announced on Wednesday that the "May issue of Playboy is unforgettable with Dancing With the Stars' Karina Smirnoff on the cover and nude inside," causing people backstage at the hit family show to freak out. "If Karina posed naked, she can kiss her dancing days goodbye," a 'DWTS' insider told me immediately after hearing of Hef's announcement on Twitter. "I hope for Karina's sake that this isn't true." Oh, but it looks to be true as Us Weekly says they've confirmed, though Karina's rep has yet to respond and ABC told me they weren't commenting. In the meantime, the sexy dancer will continue to wow audiences each week with surprise favorite 'Karate Kid' Ralph Macchio. However, the biggest surprise is going to come later this month when the May issue of Playboy hits newsstands. Given Ralph and Karina's popularity so far this season, it seems more than likely that they will still be foxtrotting away when the issue is released to the world. The immediate response of ABC, I'm told, is that having one of their dancers pose naked during an ongoing season could "soil" the wholesome show's image. "ABC publicity department controls the image of this show with an iron fist. It's a cash cow and they are not going to allow its reputation to be soiled by a dancer who wants to do Playboy," an ABC source tells me. Aside from getting into hot water with family-TV fans and the network, I'm told that Karina may have violated the terms of her contract by posing for the venerable lad mag without getting her bosses to sign off on it. It wouldn't be the first time a member of the 'DWTS' family has had to be stopped. "Just a few weeks ago, ABC PR stopped [the show's host] Tom Bergeron from doing a live webcast with an outlet they didn't approve of. I can only imagine is going on right now after Hef's tweet." Karina also wouldn't be the only person on the ballroom floor who has posed naked in Playboy. Hugh has visited the ballroom several times to cheer on his former girlfriend Kendra Wilkinson as a contestant on the show, but obviously he was paying close attention to another lady on the dance floor. http://www.popeater.com/2011/04/07/karina-smirnoff-playboy-may-dancing
     
  2. GJB

    GJB Well-Known Member

    Strange that Kendra's overall image and posing for Playboy doesn't hurt the image of the show but Karina's posing would.
     
  3. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    It seems like the issue is a media appearance that wasn't approved. If indeed it wasn't, and if indeed DWTS contracts stipulate that media appearances must be approved, it's easy to see why ABC execs might be unhappy (if indeed they are).
     
  4. pygmalion

    pygmalion Well-Known Member

    Yup. And nudity (if indeed there is some) is a side note. The issue, if there is one, is breach of contract, from where I sit. Hmm.

    Interesting timing, though. Looks like things will be coming to a head during May sweeps. :eyebrow:
     
  5. QMSF

    QMSF Member

    It's funny, the other day I was watching old videos of Slavik and Karina and it occurred to me that it's nice that someone who was very, very successful in dancesport is being recognized by mainstream media. I'm occasionally a little nonplussed by the pros on DWTS because it seems like they cast people who would be best for TV, not necessarily the best representation of DanceSport competitors. It would be unfortunate if they got rid of one of the most well-known and respected Latin competitors in recent years because of an opportunity that had arisen due to the status to which Karina had been elevated entirely because of the show itself. They package their pros in this overwrought, oversexed manor, and downplay the fact that they're great athletes and teachers. To me, this is analogous to an Olympian posing for Playboy. People wouldn't know who they are and that they're attractive if you didn't give them the platform. Calm down, ABC.

    I find this frustrating.
     
  6. pygmalion

    pygmalion Well-Known Member

    There are many, many countries in which nudity wouldn't matter at all. Just sayin. *shrug*
     
  7. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    It would be a pity (perhaps, as far as we know, and from a particular perspective) if a well-known and respected pro made her position untenable by acting outside the bounds of a written agreement.

    <shrug> Then again, if DWTS pays her X, and Playboy pays her Y + notoriety, and her satisfaction with what she's doing now is Z, she might look at the values of X, Y + notoriety, and Z, and make a judgment call.

    Plus, it could happen that this all blows over anyway. If ratings go up, and viewers clamor to keep her around, and she wants to stay around -- well, perhaps some studio exec gets a headache but nothing really changes from our perspective.
     
  8. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    Several people who appeared on the show have posed nude, more than one has done so in Playboy. I doubt that's at the center of things.
     
  9. pygmalion

    pygmalion Well-Known Member


    Agreed. :-?
     
  10. pygmalion

    pygmalion Well-Known Member


    No conspiracy theory intended, but we all know that reality shows aren't real. Who knows what is happening behind the scenes? Eh. *shrug*
     
  11. madmaximus

    madmaximus Well-Known Member

    From a professional standpoint, I would be interested at the effect this has on the show's viewership.

    It could INCREASE the show's ratings instead...




    m
     
  12. danceronice

    danceronice Well-Known Member

    Considering who's already been on the show with little/no effect (Kendra and whassherface from a previous season did a lot more than pose for Playboy--they're "famous" because they were Hugh Heffner's live-in "girlfriends" and it doesn't seem to increase or decrease viewership so I doubt just posing for the magazine would bother viewers.)

    If Karina does have a problem because of this, I'd have to think it's an issue of not getting approval, not any sort of morals clause. If there IS one, considering in addition to having celebs who are only celebs because they were "dating" the publisher of Playboy, their cohost has posed for it before they hired her, it would seem to be terribly unevenly applied.
     
  13. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    short-term and long-term results would both be interesting

    ETA

    However, I feel odd speculating on the economic impact of a person's decision to have naked pictures taken for public consumption...
     
  14. White Chacha

    White Chacha Active Member

    Who is it who said, "there's no such thing as bad publicity"?
     
  15. pygmalion

    pygmalion Well-Known Member

    There's no way for me to say all of what I'm thinking without transgressing the DF no-gossip rule. :oops: :lol:

    I will ask, however, what if Karina was already planning to retire from the show and the execs have known it for a while? A scandal/controversy could be a win-win-win-win -- for Karina, show ratings, Playboy and the viewing audience.

    Just sayin.
     
  16. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    Too bad for the show, if it's reached the point where that's how it's trying to grab spikes in ratings. Moral issues aside (for those who perceive any, and if the show were to make any attempt to capitalize on the magazine issue I think maybe I would), it's not sustainable. The next naked dancer would have to jump over a shark or something...
     
  17. pygmalion

    pygmalion Well-Known Member

    Eh. I don't see nudity as a moral issue. *shrug* But you're right. A lot of viewers probably will. And who knows what that will do to/for show ratings?

    And I hasten to add that my post was just speculation. :cool:
     
  18. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    Perhaps not, but for an employer to encourage it -- tacitly or otherwise -- in hope of garnering benefit to the employer, would strike me as being more on the wrong side of a fine line than anywhere else.
     
  19. pygmalion

    pygmalion Well-Known Member


    Eh. In any case. we'll never know.

    I would add that Karina, other high-level dancers and quite likely anybody who's been in show business is probably quite used to (even if not comfortable with) nudity. Two minute costume changes on a full set = getting naked in front of strangers. No moral judgment. Just the needs of the business. Get off the stage, get out of costume A, into costume B and back on stage before the commercial break ends doesn't exactly lend itself to old-fashioned modesty.

    Nudity may be a big deal to some people, but I honestly can't see it being a big deal to people who have to be in the spotlight in show business, at least on a professional level. Personally, they may love it, hate it, or be neutral. But, by the time they've been in the business a while, surely they must be used to it.

    My (prejudiced) two cents. :cool:
     
  20. jofjonesboro

    jofjonesboro New Member

    Since when has DWTS ever been a paragon of media virtue and wholesomeness? As far as I can recall, the show has always used scantily clad women as its hook. Where else can you see professional dancers doing Standard with bare midriffs?

    I agree with most of the other responders on this thread. It is hypocritical in the extreme for DWTS to allow behavior in its amateurs that it doesn't allow for its pros.

    jj
     

Share This Page