Why change a winning formula? seems to be the motto for TV programme makers these days as the same ideas are endlessly recycled. But where will it end?

Enough is enough. ITV1 adds yet another series to the increasingly overloaded file marked reality TV shows. This one is called Take My Mother-in-Law, a not-particularly-clever play on the old joke, "Now take my mother-in-law. No, please! Take my mother-in-law!".

They might as well call it Mother-in-Law Swap, in homage to C4's Wife Swap and the still-to-come Boss Swap.

Never waste a good idea, might be the motto of programme makers these days. Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery but it's also a cheap and easy way to make shows with tried and tested appeal built in.

At present, the TV's swap shows aren't so much multi-coloured as all the same shade. If a format strikes a chord with viewers, then other channels follow down the same road with carbon copy programmes. Only the names are changed - ever so slightly - to avoid confusion. Holiday Showdown, for instance, is Holiday Swap by any other name.

This doesn't just apply to people changing places with each other. I've lost count of the number of series about people either wanting to buy homes in the sun or set up businesses under the sun. Daytime or night-time, the schedules are full of them.

Combining two hot themes - property and the sun - pays dividends. Witness the current crop of shows that include Living The Dream, I Want That House, A Place In The Sun, and French Leave.

If the series seems to be running out of steam, just put the word Celebrity in front of the title and pump up fresh interest by putting some half-famous names into the equation.

This week's Celebrity Wife Swap paired up Big Brother winner Jade Goody with Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? cheat Charles Ingram to boring effect, but don't expect that to deter similar attempts to ring the changes on a familiar format.

It can only be a matter of time before someone gives us Royal Swap in which the Queen switches places with a commoner for a week. The ratings would go through the Palace roof.

Or what about PM Swap in which Tony Blair and Michael Howard change political places which, the more cynical would say, is the only way a Tory will get into No 10 in the foreseeable future.

Take My Mother-in-Law sticks like Superglue to the well-established rules of such ventures. Apart from the same basic idea, they all depend on conflict. Nobody wants to watch relatives or strangers getting along. The real stars are the researchers who find and hook up ill-matched people to ensure plenty of arguments and recriminations for the cameras to capture.

Nothing is sacred. The makers get away with things that would be condemned as politically incorrect in normal circumstances. When someone says that the worst thing that could happen was if the stranger in their house turns out to be black, you just know that's precisely the type of person the producers will chose to share their lives.

The second episode of Take My Mother-in-Law is typical as mother-in-law June moves in. She believes son-in-law Derek is a male chauvinist pig who's turning his ten-year-old son into a mini version of himself. She wants to turn the tables to make him pull his weight and rescue daughter Tracey from her role as his doormat.

The inevitable result, as June implements ground rules to make him do housework and other daily tasks, is constant antagonism with Derek shouting, sticking up two fingers behind her back, and dubbing her "Hitler with tits". So much for happy families, but why pay scriptwriters when you can get ad-libbed conversation of that standard?

Six weeks later, the cameras return to see if June's stay has changed things in the family. That's all right then., as long as family members have learnt their lesson, it's okay for viewers to watch them hurl insults at each other.

The makers of such series will never run out of volunteers willing to risk ridicule for a shot at fame, no matter how brief. It will only end when viewers vote with their fingers and press the off button, causing ratings to slip.

Despite that, in the interests of good TV, the message to programme-makers is clear: swap old ideas for new ones.

Published: 15/11/2003